Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1887-07-01
THE EVENING EXERCISES.
Address by Prot. George r. Moore on "Th,
Ventures of Faith"

Ventures of Faith"
In the evening another large audience
assembled at the College street church,
to listen to the annual address be
fore the University Y. NJ. G.. A., which
was delivred by Prof. George f..
Moore of Andover Theological Sem
mary. There was prevailing desire
in the large audience to "hear from
Andover," so prominently before the pub
lie just now but the scholarly discourse
delivered by Prof. Moore did not touch
directly upon the questions at issue in the
socalled new theology" Prof. Moore
was introduced to the audience by Mr..
j. n. Perrin of the graduating class,
president of the university Y. NJ. G.. A.
Rev. Mr.. Huntington offered the prayer.
Music was furnished by the same choir
and organist DIS at the afternoon service
The following is an abstract of Prof.
Moore's excellent address:
ADDRESS BEFORE THE COLLEGE Y. NJ c. A..
Professor Moore's subject was "The
Ventures of Faith" He said, in brief :
The cornerstone of religion is faith. For
religion may be best defined, if not for
the purposes of the PHILOSOPHER, for those
of the student of the history of religions,
as the relation of man to the powers
above him in which he believes" The
higher his conception of these powers the
more deeply he reflects upon his relation
to them, the more distinctly faith is
recognized rs the basis of these relations,
the fundamental principle of religion.
! The difference between one religion and
another is not in its subjective basis, but
III its conception of the character OF God
then in the nature of the good things
which it promises, or which men seek in
| it.
1t is agreed on all hands that faith is at
| ha mi tnr of n1l ra1i frinr IN 1ati
| upon which the whole structure of practi-
cal godliness as well as of theological
science rests. In fact so much emphasis
has been put upon the faith.basis of
| Christianity that men often think and
| speak of 1t as the distinguishing peculiar
ty of religion that it is founded on faith.
Very often religion is contrasted in this
| respect with science, which builds only on
the bedrock of fact. Some of the pro-
| phets OF the physical sciences particularly
have made good deal of this supposed
fundamental difference. A few years ago
1t looked as il these gentlemen, having
hOmesteaded the universe, were not going
to allow religion living room in it at all.
AT this moment their disposition seems to
rather more tolerant, and they appear
willing to leave religion in possession Of
certain uneXplored territory. Others have
sought to find qnOduS UirCndi between
religion and science on the basis of this
division, leaving each supreme in its own
realm.
But let us 20 back little and ask
whether this fundamental difference he
tween the basis OF religion and that of
science really exists. Is not faith the cor
ner-stone of science as well as of religion ?
Does not the validity of its most convnc
ing reasoning depend upon aXioms which
are merely assumed to be true-taken upon
faith Let us see
The whole imposing structure which
modern science has reared rests confessed
ly on the hypothesis of the uniformity of
nature-that from the beginning to the
end of time nature follows the same laws,
that the same causes produce the same
effects. Unless we were convinced of this |
we should not take a single step beyond |
our own actual experience and observa-
ton. There is in fact nothing of which |
we are more firmly convinced. But what |
is the nature of this conviction and on
what grounds does it rest 1t is our firm |
faith-that is all. Nobody has ever proved !
or ever can prove it. 1t is true that there |
is a cumulative argument for the truth of |
this hypothesis in the, whole history of
scientific achievement, but the evidence is |
wholly incomme:surate to the strength of |
our conviction. rniS the thinkers among
men of science frankly recognize
The uniformity OF nature is not the only |
thing which science must take on faith.
Analogical Inference, which plays so large |
Il part in discovery, rests upon the as
sulnptiuu OF an Identity OF plan or method |
running through all the works of nature.
So strong indeed is our conviction of the
truth OF such differences that we seldom |
pause to consider that their validity de-
ponds on an improved and unprovable |
poStulate-tne consistency OF nature.
And then there Is the question of the
correspondence OF our observation TO the
reality. Not to enter here into the ulti-
mate problems touching our knowledge of
the external world, or the grounds OF our
confidence that logical relations cores
pond to real relations, problems which
cannot be permanently disposed of by
branding them as metaphysical, | will
call attention to but single limitation of
our knowledge over which only faith car
ries us. We unhesitatingly trust our OBJ
servatlon of natural phenomena. We be-
lleVe that they are as we see them. And
yet 1t Is certain, as mas often been pointed
out, that what we regard as best estab-
lished by observation Is conditioned by
the physical fact OF our size and would be
wholly changed if we were very much
larger or very much smaller than we are.
If mere difference of size can cause some
of the most elementary facts of physics
and chemistry to take on so different a
gulse, what guarantee have we that we
are not subject to similar delusions And
yet we do not refuse to trust our observa-
ton. We act upon it with all confidence,
for we believe that it corresponds to the
facts. 1--WE walk by faith"
~ dPpcdlo, lueltiolS tutt WHtIutI we
dig down into the foundations of all that
we call scientific knowledge, or explore
the sources from which the very facts of
science are derived, or try the method of
discovery and proof by which the grand
structure has been built up, we find every
where that the basis OF our strongest con
victions is-faith. ! have dwelt upon this
point, not for the sake of weakening our
confidence in the results of science, but
only to have you observe that our convic-
ton of the truth of science, on which il
needful we would stake our lives, rests on
the same basis as our conviction of the
truth OF raliglOn not on a different and
more substantial one. ! hope also that in
the course of the discussion some light
has fallen upon the nature OF faith. |
think that there is often in the mindsl of
generous young men, especially among
those who have learned to think,
ana who prize as they should the freedom
of thought as their noblest right, preju.
dice-perhaps ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS faith,
as involving the surrender of that free